Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Money matters

Find financial and money-saving discussions including debt and pension chat on our Money forum. If you're looking for ways to make your money to go further, sign up to our Moneysaver emails here.

Flip

Original poster

Is this fair?

17 replies

MazzyMetro · 06/09/2022 17:51

My partner put in 50% deposit on our house, I put in 5%. Initially he felt I should pay the mortgage, because his half is already paid. I said I worried that that would lead to an unbalanced lifestyle, so we agreed I would pay two thirds of the mortgage and he pays one third (to be fair I wasn't opposed to this as I wanted to make sure that if we split up one day I will have some equity.)

However this has still lead to an unbalanced life, we earn a similar amount but he works nearly half as much as me and goes on quite a few more holidays than me. He also has a lot more savings and assets than me (a rental property), so has more financial security than me (I currently have no savings or assets beyond my 5% share in the house).

He feels this is fair because he worked hard to build up his business to enable him to work less and buy property. But it doesn't sit right with me. What do you think? I can see it from his point of view also.

This has been the arrangement for 2 years, but it's come to a head again now because I've inherited some money and I'm trying to decide what to do with it.

He would like to free up some cash for a business venture, so he is keen for me to buy a portion of either our house or his rental house, from of him (we have a deed of trust already, and that would be updated to reflect the new ownership percentages). However he doesn't feel my monthly payments should go down in the same % ratio as the amount I would pay him (because he feels he's doing me a favour already by paying one 3rd of the mortgage that he feels is my mortgage). He has said a few times that if we weren't together he would be mortgage free, so he feels he is subsidising me because I didn't have a much deposit to put down on the house.

I feel like I would prefer to keep my money separate and invest it however I would like. I would consider paying off some of our mortgage, but that is fixed for another 8 years.

I'm actually getting some independent financial advice tomorrow, but I'd be really interested to know what people think of this arrangement more from a relationship point of view?

(Context: we don't have children together, but one each from previous relationships, so I don't feel I've given up any career to raise his child)

OP posts:

Plexie · 06/09/2022 18:00

No, I don't think it's fair and I think it disadvantages you. When couples contribute different amounts to a house a deposit, there's a way to agree to keep the proportion 'owned' by each person equal to their proportion of the deposit, and then split any additional equity 50-50, assuming they contribute 50-50 to the mortgage. I don't know how to explain it properly but I'm sure someone will be along soon who can.

Plexie · 06/09/2022 18:05

As for "if we weren't together he would be mortgage free", if he could afford to, why didn't he buy the house outright and own it 100%? He may have contributed 50% to the deposit but that only buys him half a house and he's dependent on someone (you) paying the mortgage for the rest of it.

Ilikewinter · 06/09/2022 18:30

No I dont think its fair either, I dont have any suggestions but @Plexie post / suggestion feels like a good option.
You both keep your respective investments and both contribute to the mortgage.

Soontobe60 · 06/09/2022 18:32

Plexie · 06/09/2022 18:00

But they're not contributing equally to the mortgage.

recklessgran · 07/09/2022 11:18

No. not fair. I don't like the sound of him at all - this doesn't sound like a proper loving partnership to me. Surely he should be paying half the mortgage regardless of who paid what deposit wise? Is the inheritance enough for a deposit on a house of your own OP?

DoodlePug · 07/09/2022 11:36

The usual 'fair' arrangements are either splitting expenses 50:50 or proportional to your incomes.

How much of the house does he 'own'? He put in 10x as much money as you, would he expect any equity to be split 10:1? That would be unfair if you're paying more of the mortgage, you should be gradually increasing your share.

Buying a greater share of your house isn't a bad way to invest your money if you want to, I'd have nothing to do with the rental house though, fair chance house prices will drop and landlords will be unable to evict tenants who can't pay.

Isanyholeagoal · 07/09/2022 11:42

When you bought the house you each should have ring fenced your deposit and paid the rest of the mortgage 50/50 so if it was ever sold you each get back the deposit you put in + 50% of the additional equity (assuming not in negative equity)

the rest imo is not a factor as they aren’t joint assets and presumably you aren’t married so what’s his is his and what’s yours is yours

vivainsomnia · 07/09/2022 11:47

You can't have it both ways. Either you pay equal but he has a much bigger share if you separate so bigger investment, or you have similar investment and same equity in separation but it's fair you pay more of the mortgage to make up for it.

How many years of paying more of the mortgage would it get you at a same level to what he's put in?

reegee · 07/09/2022 12:09

To begin with, is the current position is fair, (before you start amending it) ? This depends on the ownership percentages in the existing deed of trust.
If he owns 72.5% ( original 50% deposit plus half remaining 45%) and you own 27.5% (original 5% deposit plus half remaining 45%), then I would expect you to pay the mortgage 50 / 50.
If you both own 50% each, then I can see his argument that you should pay all the mortgage as he has already 'paid' his 50%. However, while this may be fair in the strict financial sense, whether it is the right way to treat a partner in a committed, loving relationship is very questionable.

Dox9 · 07/09/2022 12:15

He might feel like he's doing you a favour by paying 1/3 but you have also done him a favour by upgrading the two of you to a house he couldn't (wouldnt) buy outright.

blockpavingismynightmare · 07/09/2022 12:21

The part of this I do not like is how busy he is when deciding who pays what and how much they pay in order for him to get the benefit. It's all a bit one-sided isn't it?
What you do with your money is up to you.
It also looks like he puts a lot of thought into money matters and not into your own personal welfare.
I would not like this one little bit

RedHelenB · 10/09/2022 07:28

Dox9 · 07/09/2022 12:15

He might feel like he's doing you a favour by paying 1/3 but you have also done him a favour by upgrading the two of you to a house he couldn't (wouldnt) buy outright.

This. I don't see the current arrangement as unfair on you either.

Winter2020 · 10/09/2022 13:06

I also wonder if it’s enough for a house deposit - then you can get your own place. I couldn’t share a life with someone who thought we could live in unequal ways. Although if he had ring fenced his deposit to get it back then that would be fair enough.

Buy your own place and then he can pay you back your equity (including what you have built up paying two thirds of the mortgage - so two thirds of equity paid off after the deposits since you bought). Remind him he can now pay off his house and be mortgage free.

If you do want to buy more equity do it to your main house and make sure any legals are updated to reflect your greater share. I think buying in should be from the bank though reducing your mortgage - not direct from your partner and so not reducing your mortgage. Then you would still have to pay the same amount and haven’t benefitted at all from your lump sum (although you would if you later sold and got your equity of course). Are the different % legally protected or just what you have formally agreed. If he has ringfenced his 50% etc don’t do anything without updating the new legal position.

Don’t buy into his rental property - it isn’t likely to make much money aside from the value of the property rising over time and he might never want to sell. Any rise in value will be taxable after your permitted amount.

Winter2020 · 10/09/2022 13:08

*informally agreed

Yupsuuuure · 10/09/2022 15:41

So his money is his, but yours should also be used for his benefit too?

BeetrootBeetrootGhali · 10/09/2022 15:55

I think you have a pretty good deal here.

You’re only paying one third of what it would cost you to live in a house that you wouldn’t otherwise afford.

You’re not married, he has no legal tie to you so neither of you should be feathering the other’s nest.

For what it’s worth, I think you’re nuts to allow him to pay towards the remaining mortgage. In the case of a split, he’ll come away with two-thirds if the equity, and you with one-third.

lookthisway · 10/09/2022 16:13

I agree that you need to keep this inheritance separate from his finances. You need to protect yourself and build up some savings and assets of your own. I am glad you are going to get some independent advice but I imagine they would advise against paying off the mortgage especially as it is fixed for 8 years, and instead look at pension (if you don't already have a work one), emergency savings, long term savings, investments and then maybe some play money.

@MazzyMetro Good luck and would love an update

Flip